www jurist law pitt
The case Weetwood Services Ltd v ansvar Holdings Ltd [2007], which is the effect with a duration of a contract. The defendant occupied a site on which he planned to take a car showroom. She received a notice of allowance the local authority on the creation of an unauthorized channel for a stream on the website. The existence of the channel on the building permit for the planned car.

It was the intention of the Authority that the channel be removed and through an open channel stream. The defendant, using the services of the applicant's engineering company, for a report on the canal. The plaintiff was asked:

- Whether the channel was in the position the amount of water, which vary by them (the "1 in 100-year test"); and

- Whether the current stream could be back in a 10 m wide channel along the north coast of the landing.

With the commitment letter, the applicant must:

- Conducting a topographical survey;

- For the assessment of the hydrological catchment inflow channel to give way lines for the return periods of 5, 25, 50 and 100 years;

- To build a HEC-RAS model of water flow with the channel, and with the spare channel and

- To the two models for different times back and report on the results.

In December 2001 the applicant, a report has concluded that the canal was inadequate. The defendant argued that the report does not match the letter of commitment that is not enough in the calculations for the two models has been submitted, only the results.

The plaintiff thereupon some additional information, although not to the satisfaction of the defendant who refused, the fee of around £ 5,000. The applicant will be issued.

The judges decided that the boundary of the applicant with the obligation under the letter of commitment was to the results of mathematical modeling, without more. The defendant appealed.

The question was whether the wording of the letter commitment or by an implied term (the defendant's alternative argument), the applicant had in breach of contract should not be the basis of the results of the modeling that they have undertaken.

The appeal is dismissed.

It was overturned on appeal, that the actual construction of the engagement letter, the plaintiff was not bound to the calculations contained in his report, only the results. The proposed term implies was therefore not necessary for economic efficiency. It was therefore decided that the purpose of the participation of the plaintiff was to determine the potential for flooding, the information that the engineers who had done.

© RT Coopers, 2007. This background information is not a comprehensive or complete statement of the law on the issues can not be considered legal advice. It is only on general issues. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to the particular circumstances.

Please contact us for more information on the assessment of damage caused by termination of the contract on enquiries@rtcoopers.com